Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
Healthcare Bill Part III; Obamacare
Topic Started: Mar 3 2014, 02:20 PM (48,566 Views)
Baldo
Member Avatar

In other words it was a huge bait & switch promoted by Obama & the Democrats.

"Looking out for your interests!"
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp

I'm not seeing it as so much of a switch to single payer, just a new right that can't be repealed. The MAJOR cost factor problem is passed along for the next solution to be passed, then ALL are on-board owning it ....under Barry's legacy.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Baldo
Member Avatar

kbp
Jul 5 2015, 11:30 AM
I'm not seeing it as so much of a switch to single payer, just a new right that can't be repealed. The MAJOR cost factor problem is passed along for the next solution to be passed, then ALL are on-board owning it ....under Barry's legacy.
bait & switch in that we were promised "savings"

What we got was higher costs that we had to buy. That's worse that a store switching products for higher costs. At least you can walk away. In Obamaworld's store you have to pay a penalty for not buying.

Thanks Supreme Jerk Roberts
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp

NYTimes...
 
Health Insurance Companies Seek Big Rate Increases For 2016
Health insurance companies around the country are seeking rate increases of 20 percent to 40 percent or more, saying their new customers under the Affordable Care Act turned out to be sicker than expected. Federal officials say they are determined to see that the requests are scaled back. Blue Cross and Blue Shield plans — market leaders in many states — are seeking rate increases that average 23 percent in Illinois, 25 percent in North Carolina, 31 percent in Oklahoma, 36 percent in Tennessee and 54 percent in Minnesota, according to documents posted online by the federal government and state insurance commissioners and interviews with insurance executives...
I'm not aware of any authority that would allow such a move by the fed, but... we know that has nothing to do with how they operate!
Quote:
 
http://www.wsj.com/articles/oregon-backs-hefty-rise-in-health-insurance-premiums-1435873598

Oregon Backs Hefty Rise in Health-Insurance Premiums

Oregon’s insurance regulator has approved big premium increases sought by health plans for 2016 under the health law, and in some cases ordered higher raises than insurers requested, signaling that the cost of insurance for people who buy it on their own could jump after two years of relatively modest growth.

Around the U.S., the biggest insurers have proposed hefty premium increases for the year ahead, based on what they say they now know about the costs of covering people newly enrolled under the Affordable Care Act. Supporters of the health law have been counting on state regulators to rein in hefty premium increases for the law’s third year in full effect.

But in Oregon, the first state to announce final 2016 rates, Insurance Commissioner Laura Cali approved an average 25.6% increase for Moda Health Plan Inc., the biggest plan on the state’s health exchange. She also gave a green light to average increases of 30% or more for four smaller companies, in a decision released this week. And she required plans that hadn’t attempted to raise rates to do so anyway, including Kaiser Foundation Health Plan of the Northwest, by an average of 8.3%.

Ms. Cali said the changes were necessary for plans to stay afloat. State actuaries had reviewed claims incurred in 2014 and concluded they exceeded premiums collected that year by $127 million, or an average of $624 a person who signed up for insurance on their own, she said.

“We share the concerns expressed through public comment about the affordability of health insurance in Oregon, and these final rates were approved in order to protect consumers from extreme rate increases in the future. Inadequate rates could also result in companies going out of business in the middle of the plan year, or being unable to pay claims,” she said in a statement.

“Our ultimate responsibility to Oregon consumers is to ensure that rates cover the cost of health care. Our final rate decisions reflect our commitment to ensuring that Oregonians can count on the coverage they purchase.”

Chris Stenrud, a spokesman for the Kaiser plan, said the insurer had “confidence that we have priced for long-term stability. Nevertheless we respect the division’s decision and will adjust our 2016 rates accordingly.”

As recently as Wednesday, the health law’s backers were still telling people not to panic about significant increases. President Barack Obama was asked about the issue as he took questions about the Affordable Care Act in Nashville, Tenn., another state where the biggest health plan has proposed a large jump in premiums after previously having some of the lowest in the country.

“When all the dust settled and the commissioners who were empowered to review these rates forced insurance companies to justify what they were seeking, what you discovered … is that the rates actually didn’t go up as much as people thought,” Mr. Obama said, speaking about last year. “My expectation is … that they’ll come in significantly lower than what’s being requested.”

A Health and Human Services spokeswoman said Friday that Oregon had also seen higher proposed increases than other states and those states might yet fare differently.

“Each health insurance market is unique, and, as we saw in 2015, trends in any single market may not be representative of those in the nation as a whole,” said Katie Hill, the spokeswoman.
I did a little research... Insurance Commissioner Laura Cali, who is an actuary, was appointed under a Democrat Governor, so they can't blame the GOP for the increases!

...she required plans that hadn’t attempted to raise rates to do so anyway, including Kaiser Foundation Health Plan of the Northwest, by an average of 8.3% ... Chris Stenrud, a spokesman for the Kaiser plan, said the insurer had “confidence that we have priced for long-term stability. Nevertheless we respect the division’s decision and will adjust our 2016 rates accordingly.”

Laura Cali knows the that the overall result of last year was $127 million more paid out than was collected in premiums. She also has the exact numbers for each insurer, including Kaiser. I suspect that the leftist Kaiser group was playing what is left of the 3-R's and had some wild growth projected into their enrollment for next year.

Anyway, Barry is spending more taxpayer dollars, while spreading BS as hope and change. My guess is that Barry feels it would be better to redistribute the funds to cover losses after-the-fact (3-R's), hiding it from the up front and obvious place it should be, the premiums. The 3-R's redistribution through what is simply a bailout could hit a snag or two, but that's another problem to solve later!
.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2015/07/02/house-gop-and-white-house-trade-shots-over-obamacare/

House GOP and White House Trade Shots Over Obamacare

The Supreme Court showdown over the Affordable Care Act may be over, but the legal offensive against the law isn’t.

Lawyers representing the Republican-controlled House of Representatives and the Obama administration took their best shots at each other’s arguments this week in their battle over Obamacare.

The case, filed in federal court in Washington, D.C. last year, is about whether the executive branch overstepped its bounds in how it’s paying for and enforcing parts of the health law. Briefs filed Wednesday deal with the former, focusing on a component of the health law known as an “offset program,” which authorizes the government to pay back insurers for discounts they are required to offer low-income enrollees.

The House Republicans argue the law does not authorize the White House to make such payments. The Obama administration argues it does.

But for now, the sides are debating a threshold issue: whether House Republicans should be allowed to use the courts to settle the dispute. The president’s side argues that Congress has not suffered injury enough to justify seeking redress through the courts, calling it an “unprecedented suit” that improperly drags the courts into a squabble between Congress and the White House.

In its brief, the administration warns that if the court allows the suit to go forward, the House “could sue the Executive over virtually any dispute over the meaning of federal law.”

In a brief filed the same day, lawyers for House Republicans say they did, in fact, suffer injury: “Defendants’ Section 1402 Offset Program payments to insurers in the absence of any such affirmative vote by the House thus injures the House in the most direct and concrete way imaginable: by usurping and negating its most fundamental and defining constitutional function, the power of the purse.”

The House Republicans say the question of whether the offset payments were authorized by Congress isn’t even up for debate. “There is no dispute that Congress did not appropriate funds,” the brief drafted by George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley states.

The brief says the White House “craves a bright-line no-standing rule that would free it of any scrutiny by the Judicial Branch whenever the Legislative Branch is the plaintiff.”

It’s now up to U.S. District Judge Rosemary M. Collyer to decide whether Boehner v. Obama* should be tossed.

Unlike the Obamacare case the Supreme Court just decided in the president’s favor, the House lawsuit isn’t so much about the wording of the law but about constitutional constraints on executive discretion.

While the dispute is more abstract than in King v. Burwell, the stakes are big, says South Texas College of Law professor Josh Blackman, an Obamacare expert.

He notes that lawyers representing Republicans are looking for more than a symbolic victory; they seek injunctive relief. The suit asks the court to order the Treasury Department from making any more offset payments under Section 1402 of the Affordable Care Act unless Congress rewrites the law.

“The insurers would be put in a very difficult spot if they could not receive these payments,” Mr. Blackman told Law Blog.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/07/06/survey-finds-higher-expenses-colleges-and-employees-health-benefits

Everyone Pays More

Colleges are, on average, paying more for health benefits coverage for employees. And some of those colleges are passing some expenses on to employees.

Those are among the key findings of a survey being released today by the College and University Professional Association for Human Resources.

One in five colleges, the survey found, are passing on some of the higher costs associated with the Affordable Care Act in at least one of the following ways:

Increased in-network deductibles.
Increased out-of-pocket limits.
Increased employees’ share of dependent coverage costs.
Increased employees’ share of premium costs.

And of course, while not referenced in the CUPA-HR report summary, many colleges responded to the Affordable Care Act by limiting the sections given to adjuncts, costing them significant loss of income.

The most popular form of health plan offered by the 525 institutions surveyed (across all sectors) is a PPO, or preferred provider organization. Just under 90 percent of institutions offer a PPO option. High-deductible health plans -- offered by 46 percent of colleges -- are going up substantially in popularity with institutions. That option was offered by just 17 percent of institutions in 2009.

The average annual total premium for all four plan types combined -- PPO, health maintenance organizations (HMO), point of service (POS) and high-deductible health plans -- was $6,597 for employee-only coverage and $18,087 for employee plus family coverage. Increases varied by plan type. For employee-only coverage, the largest increase was 4 percent. For employee and family plans, the largest increase was 6 percent.

[...]
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Baldo
Member Avatar

AP Admits: Obamacare Is a Likely Factor in 'Increasing Part-Time Employment'

Though the Associated Press is now basically admitting it, we all knew it. Obamacare's 30-hours-per-week definition of a "full-time employee" for employer health insurance coverage purposes has been responsible for one of the fundamentally negative changes in the American workforce — a noticeable move away from full-time to part-time employment. In a report with a current Saturday morning time stamp at the AP's national web site which originally went up on Friday, the wire service's Christopher Rugaber and Josh Boak covered the "new normal" in the job market. ...snipped

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2015/07/06/ap-admits-obamacare-likely-factor-increasing-part-time-employment
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp

No a whisper from Kaiser health news!
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mason
Member Avatar
Parts unknown
.
Did you notice the stories about Premium increases only hit MSM after the Supreme Court blessing and approval

Timing

.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mason
Member Avatar
Parts unknown
.
We are to believe Fraud Roberts was wholly unaware. He painted a very rosy picture of Obamacare.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/07/06/ouch-massive-obamacare-premium-increases-will-dominate-2016/

Every way Obama claimed the program would be paid for has failed miserably.

Ask your Emergency Room Doc.

.
Edited by Mason, Jul 6 2015, 11:17 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp

Quote:
 
http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-sf-uninsured-20150706-story.html

In ironic twist, S.F. is worried Obamacare could hurt its most vulnerable residents

That D@&% out-of-pocket. The irony here is O-care centers heavily on preventive care, which many that can't afford the out-of-pocket will do exactly the opposite ...wait until the ER is needed!

Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp

Quote:
 
http://kff.org/health-reform/report/coverage-expansions-and-the-remaining-uninsured-a-look-at-california-during-year-one-of-aca-implementation/

Coverage Expansions and the Remaining Uninsured: A Look at California During Year One of ACA Implementation

[...]

How does coverage affect financial security?

Health care costs can be a major burden for low-income families. Survey findings indicate that while coverage can ameliorate some of the financial challenges that low and moderate income adults face, many will continue to face financial challenges in other areas of their lives.

Many Covered California enrollees report difficulty paying their monthly premium. Nearly half of newly insured adults (47%) say it is somewhat or very difficult to afford their monthly premium, compared to just 27% of adults who were insured before 2014. Further, 44% of Covered California enrollees report difficulty paying their monthly premium, versus a quarter of adults with other types of private coverage.

[...]

Why are people still uninsured and what are their coverage options?

Though much attention was paid to the difficulties with the application and enrollment process during the 2014 open enrollment period, logistical issues were not a leading reason why people went without insurance in 2014. Rather, lack of awareness of new coverage options and financial assistance appear to be a major barrier.

Most adults who were uninsured in fall 2014 had not tried to get ACA coverage, and perceptions of cost and eligibility were a common reason for not obtaining coverage. The main reason that all uninsured gave for why they lack coverage is that it is too expensive (44%). Among the roughly one-third of uninsured who tried to sign up for ACA coverage, the most common reason people gave for not having ACA coverage was being told they were ineligible (38%) or because it was too expensive (21%). Still, when asked directly about application difficulty, most uninsured adults who sought ACA coverage reported difficulty with at least one aspect of the process, and most tried more than one avenue.

Few adults who were uninsured at the end of 2014 had plans to obtain ACA coverage in 2015. Only about half of uninsured adults indicated that they plan to get coverage in 2015, and few who do identified Medicaid or Marketplace coverage as their goal. Rather, higher shares indicate that they don’t know where they will get coverage or plan to get coverage through a job. However, few are likely to gain coverage through an employer either because they are self-employed or not in a working family (38%), or because the employer does not offer coverage (32%) or coverage for which they are eligible (8%).

[...]
This probably is a study that would have similar results in any state.
.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Baldo
Member Avatar

Whopeee! The Govt is passing out money!

Big Health Care Mergers Being Fueled by Obamacare Cash

Supersized health care companies, flush on Obamacare money, are in a merger frenzy as health insurers, hospitals and drug companies bulk up to take advantage of government spending in Obamacare exchanges, state Medicaid programs and Medicare Advantage for the baby boomers, says The Los Angeles Times.

The latest billion-dollar deal occurred last week when Medicaid insurer Centene Corp. bought Woodland Hills insurer Health Net Inc. for $6.8 billion.

And more billion-dollar deals are predicted as big health insurers shop for companies that boost their government business.

The Times quoted Gerald Kominski, director of the UCLA Center for Health Policy Research, saying, “The Affordable Care Act is really driving this merger mania. There are billions of dollars pouring into the system, and it's money to buy insurance. It's not entirely clear the savings get passed on to consumers.”

This is the biggest expansion of insurance coverage in half a century, lifting stock prices and revenues across the health care industry, thanks to Obamacare.

The Supreme Court ruling last week keeps, also helps big health care companies because it keeps the money spigot turned on by upholding the premium subsidies that millions of Americans now rely on to pay for health insurance.

Over the next decade, the federal government is expected to spend $1.2 trillion on subsidies and other aspects of Obamacare.

Since September 2013 nearly 17 million Americans have gained health insurance, and billions of dollars in uncompensated care has been wiped out for hospitals that are seeing more paying patients.

But some regulators and consumer advocates are worried about increasing consolidation. They fear the nation's $3-trillion health care tab will keep growing uncontrollably, consuming government budgets and getting into the pocketbooks of everyday Americans.

The Times quoted Glenn Melnick, a health care economist and professor at the University of Southern California, saying, “We cannot afford what we are paying now. Health care could eat up the federal budget.”

http://news.heartland.org/newspaper-article/2015/07/06/big-health-care-mergers-being-fueled-obamacare-cash


Unfortunately somebody has to pay for this
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp

So much for that competition thingy the marketplace would produce.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Baldo
Member Avatar

kbp
Jul 7 2015, 12:29 PM
So much for that competition thingy the marketplace would produce.
Opa!
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · LIESTOPPERS UNDERGROUND · Next Topic »
Add Reply